Mr Flibble Rules – NOT OK

One statistic you will not find however hard you search is the percentage of people involved in espionage who end up permanently insane. But what is concealed is often the information you most need to know.

Criminals, con artists and tyrannies have this in common – they disrupt people’s perception of reality in order to con, dupe, get away with their crimes, or oppress others better. All engage in mind games, lies, muddying the water, concealing evidence, gagging their victims, and in the process of distorting reality to suit themselves, leave their victims mentally damaged.

Madness and despotism are joined at the hip.

You have only to think of Hitler to see how one man’s insanity infected an entire nation and co-opted others to his insane agenda.

The creeping insanity in our society could almost be a measure of the spread of gang stalking – one by one our institutions reflect the spread of this social sickness. Mickey Mouse news; hospitals who neglect the elderly and helpless patients to death; Keystone Cop police; judges who ignore evidence; defence lawyers who act for the prosecution; the law-abiding and sane in prison and mental hospitals while the criminals and insane wander loose; education turned into a game where nobody knows the rules but will be punished for breaking them; bureaucracies which alter, replace, conceal and destroy essential records; rumours, lies, slander –

Mr Flibble rules – not OK





Is the gang stalking tactic of interfering with the mail being applied to other sections of the populace?

Citizens, not serfs

One of the tactics gang stalkers use against Targeted Individuals is interfering with the mail. Letters you send don’t arrive or they arrive very late. Letters sent to you don’t arrive at all or also arrive late. You cannot avoid the problem by using Recorded or Registered. The same happens.

All of us must interact with bureaucracies and interfering with the mail can create havoc in an individual’s life.

I only discovered I was a target of gang stalkers last year. When I found out about the tactics gang stalkers use I realised it was likely myself and my husband had had our mail DELIBERATELY interfered with.

We have experienced the following.

When my husband had cancer letters advising him of hospital appointments would arrive the day after the appointment was scheduled. This caused delays in treatment as he then had to make another appointment and was accused of wasting…

View original post 355 more words

Gang stalkers stonewalling, gaslighting and lies

Gang stalkers employ a combination of lies, gaslighting and stonewalling to frame their victim’s behaviour  as not normal.

All social interactions rely on a degree of trust and cooperation. Gang stalking interference destroys this trust and cooperation rendering everything the Target does ineffective. Which leaves the gang stalkers free to define the Target’s situation anyway they please.

Take a simple example. It is impossible to live in our society without communicating with various bureaucracies.  These communications usually occur at a distance making all of us reliant on the postal service. Interfering with the post, preventing mail arriving  or interfering with it in transit creates huge possibilities for sabotaging a Target’s life.

In my own case, my communications with the HMRC appears to have broken down. While I lived with my late husband who died last year, I received very frequent correspondence from the HMRC constantly adjusting my tax code, as I am in receipt of income from several small pensions. Since moving to this address a year ago I have hardly heard from them, despite my writing to them frequently informing them of every change in my financial circumstances. In May I received a letter from them expressing condolences on the death of my husband and advising that I needed to inform them about just being awarded Bereavement Allowance for THIS year as it might affect the tax I have to pay. This information was completely wrong, as my husband died last year and I was in receipt of Bereavement Benefit last year, a fact I told them of, and which they knew, as shortly after my husband’s death they had written to me informing me of one of his pensions which I knew nothing about. I immediately wrote back to them correcting their error and giving them all the relevant facts, and I have heard nothing since.

I also sent a cheque to make up an incomplete year of National Insurance payments, as this will affect my state pension which I am due to receive next year. Again, no reply.

Further when I moved to this address, I immediately sent back an electoral registration form and only found out a year later that I was not on the electoral register, the form presumably lost in the post.

So what is going on? How can I find out if when I write a letter it disappears into the void and is not received by the addressee. Or if letters sent to me do not arrive?

Where possible I have tried to follow up letters with e-mails, however this facility is not always available, very often there is a failure to send, the e-mail is just scrambled, or there is no reply, not even an acknowledgement of receipt.

Fracturing standard communications presumably to replace them with some other manipulation is just one technique.

When you do communicate with people face to face, these communications are rendered useless by stonewalling.  The method here is when you tell someone something, they smile and nod and agree, then they don’t do anything, treating the communication as if it had not occurred.  And so you get nowhere. Reasonable social interactions become impossible as all social exchange depends on cooperation.  The other party withholds cooperation. A simple example. This house has a communal washing machine. You buy tokens from the housekeeper. On several occasions when I tried to buy tokens, the housekeeper smiled, said yes and then didn’t do anything. So what am I supposed to do? Chase him? But if I do that he could claim I was harassing HIM. Very clever. An attempt to manipulate my behaviour to look as if I am the anti-social individual. The housekeeper is himself being stonewalled by the estate agents and the landlords who refuse to communicate with him, making the job of looking after the house, which should be a simple task enormously difficult.

Another situation is in process and I predict there will be a stonewalling response. The heating in the house has been off since the beginning of August. Payment for the heating is inclusive in my rent, so I am paying for a service I am not getting. The housekeeper has been doing his best to get the estate agents and/or the landlord to respond, but with no result. They are stonewalling him. It is now half way through September and the weather has turned cold and a bad winter has been predicted. No heating.

I predict when I call in to pay my rent and ask the estate agents about the heating there will be a fob off response and nothing will be done. And of course if I follow this up because they have done nothing, this will be recast as I am a complaining, trouble-making tenant.

The situation is framed so you can’t win, a manufactured double-bind, where whatever you do you are made to look as if you are in the wrong even when the entire situation had been manipulated and controlled by other people.



Applying Murphy’s Law to the plebs – problem dumping

We all know the joke Murphy’s Law ” anything that can go wrong, will go wrong”.  The saying appears to have originated out of the craft of engineering,  where people learnt from experience that things had to be designed exactly right, or sooner or later they would fail.  But the expression soon spread into wider society where common experience suggested that such a “law” explained why things go wrong.

Of course, things don’t just go wrong, they are caused to go wrong. One of the enlightening experiences of parenting is the amazing chaos sub-intelligent beings (children) can cause without putting any effort into it, and the amazing amount of effort the parent has to invest in order to head off incipient disaster. If we weren’t blinded by biology into liking our children they would seem fine gifts to give our enemies to bring disaster, loss and 24/7 disruption into their lives.

So far the military have not used children as such as a means to sabotage their enemies.  However, where it comes to sabotage, attrition, dirty tricks, distraction, stressing, exhaustion, contamination, and designing risk situations, it seems as if the military complex has discovered that children’s erratic, unreasonable, wasteful and plain batty behaviour are excellent tactics to inflict on anyone you want to oppress.

There is a class dimension to this as well. Personally, I have no objection to people of wealth and status distancing themselves from the problems caused by living in close proximity to other people. I do object though when they use their wealth and political clout to enforce those bad conditions on people of lower rank and wealth who are trying hard to avoid them. It seems the upper classes are not just content to put themselves out of harms way, but deliberately put others into harms way, like a sort of social sponge to soak up everything harmful in society before it reaches them.  Their motive is not to solve problems or allow social problems to be solved, but to displace problems onto every group apart from their own, to maintain their pre-eminent position. Not problem solving but problem dumping. They don’t want the problems solved. They are using them as weapons to attack lower social class groups without seeming to do so.  It is harassment by proxy.

There is no need for the general populace to be afflicted with noise, anti-social neighbours, out of control dogs and children, vandals and intimidation from gangs of criminal youths. That was what the police were invented for in the 19th century, and until the end of the 20th century they were doing a relatively good job in maintaining the public peace. Even a poor person if they are law-abiding should have the right to live their life in reasonable peace and security – unless the state is saying that is no longer the state’s responsibility, and it is up to each citizen to do what is needed to ensure their own peace.

Problems don’t just happen. Everything that happens is caused. If  the reason for the manufacture of social chaos from which the ruling class are immune, is that the ruling class intend to hide behind their high walls and ghettoise the entire rest of the population, it is time to concentrate attention on the cause, and refuse to be distracted by the symptoms.


Stigmatising the entire population as criminals to legally steal their assets and justify totalitarian rule – is that the game?


Pretend, just for the sake of argument, that we are being ruled by criminals whose ambition is to commit the Grand Theft of stealing EVERYTHING that everyone owns, and reduce everyone to slavery.

In a democratic country, under rule of law, how could that be accomplished?

Our laws protect us. As citizens we have rights. Institutions such as banks, pension providers, taxation, employment and other official records and bureaucracies are run honestly, legally and with professional integrity by people of integrity who can be trusted.

Who is best placed to corrupt an entire society? Who knows how everything works and can pull strings in every area of society?

The first safeguard of a citizen is that he is law-abiding. In a rule of law society the only justification that the state has to interfere in a citizen’s life is criminal behaviour. Against criminals the state has the right to pry, set aside privacy, practice surveillance, accuse, arrest using direct force and confine to prison or a mental institution.

All the state has to do to justify direct force against a citizen is to class the citizen as a criminal. An entire country of law-abiding people can be made out to be criminal by creating such a plethora of nit-picking laws that a person who jay-walks or drops a cigarette butt is put into the same category as murderers, racketeers or embezzlers and treated with draconian penalties.

But there will still be many people who avoid even accidentally breaking any of society’s rules. To trap such the judiciary itself needs to be corrupted. Judges who pass perverse sentences. Defence lawyers who act for the prosecution. Corrupt police who fabricate and conceal evidence. Administrators who “lose” records. And if all else fails psychiatrists who are prepared to declare anybody insane and needing urgently to be confined to a mental institution.

But still there are large areas of social activity where records of fact are maintained as a matter of course. Records which prove a person’s identity, prove their education and health, reveal a lifetime of honest work and fulfilling all social obligations. To be able to discredit and criminalise anyone in society, all these social institutions, bureaucracies and records have to be infiltrated.

Corruption in high places is a staple of human history and every country in the world. Ruling elites are noted for their duplicity, venality and personal moral corruption. They have skeletons in the cupboard which can be used to guarantee their total compliance.

But the generally honest middle class, with their class ethic of high professional and personal standards have since their emergence subsequent to the Black Death, been a strong counter force to the corrupt ruling class.  Corrupting this mainstay of social justice, fairness, rationality and stability requires planning.

The middle class mind-set has three Achilles heels. The first is their own honesty, with the resultant difficulty in understanding criminality in others. The second is their desire to better themselves which leads to irrational deference to the social class above, which generally does NOT share their ethical values. The third is their fear of losing status to working class people with greater ability. The middle class is hypocritical in that they say they wish people to be judged and promoted on their merit, where it applies to middle class people such as themselves so that they can be promoted, but they do not wish working class people to be included in the competition.

So the middle classes naivety can be exploited, alongwith their hopeful and trusting deference to their “social superiors”. All that a “superior” has to do to gain a middle class persons cooperation is to tell them what they want to believe – that that working class/black person they dealt with in the course of their work as an employer/doctor/landlord/estate agent/bank employee etc, is a dangerous criminal and the state needs their help in surveillance of that person in the interests of national security. Once recruited their lives will be trawled for any criminal behaviour however minor to be used against them. And this comprehensive trawl will be extended to their family and nearest associates. Knowledge is power indeed.

Now the corrupt tools of a corrupt state has access to medical records, bank records, housing provision, employment provision, and legitimate confidential records of all kinds on everyone in the country which can be scrutinised for wealth to be appropriated whenever convenient at some time in the future when crucial records have been “lost” or altered.

The middle classes in harness to corrupt rulers, the working class harassed, stone walled and attacked at every turn, control is complete.



They Want Your Money

There have been occasional strange stories in the press over the years about an odd person just giving money away on the street to random strangers. It raises a chuckle, doesn’t it? If only, you think.

In a recent story,  the man,  completely sane, and it was his own legitimately earned money he was giving out, was rushed to a mental hospital. This is at a time when mental patients can’t even get into mental hospitals. So, what was the emergency?

That gave me pause to think.  Why? What possible objection could the state have to an honest citizen giving his money away to anyone he wants?

When I put this against my own gang stalking experience a possible explanation suggests itself.

As a gang stalking target lies are spread to the community that I live in, that I am some kind of criminal.

By implication that makes my savings and inheritances from my late-husband and late-mother,  suspect, possibly the proceeds of whatever alleged crimes I am alleged to be involved in. Which would make my own legitimately earned resources subject to seizure by the state.

Over the years I have donated substantial sums to charities and hospitals. Over time I have started to suspect whether these charities/hospitals got to keep my donations. What if my gang stalkers followed up my donations to the hospitals and told them, falsely, that those donations were “dirty” money, the proceeds of crime, and not legitimate donations?

When recently, when my very delayed inheritance from my late-husband came through, I went to my solicitor  to ask how  a Deed of Variation could be drawn up to directly pay the inheritance to the hospital which treated my husband’s cancer. I thought by doing this, this would remove any question of legitimacy and I could be sure the recipient would get the money.

The Solicitor told me I could not do this, as I had already “touched” the money by lodging the cheque in my bank account. I explained that I had done so as I needed to be sure the cheque would not bounce, otherwise there would be no need for a Deed of Variation.

The Solicitor then went on to say, this could be money-laundering and such legal action would make him a party!

In the event I made the donation through normal channels and keep my fingers crossed that they got it, got to keep it and weren’t lied to that they are now a party to money laundering and in order to not get prosecuted for this very serious crime, just need to do the odd “favour” here and there, for the “authorities”.

In the wonderful world we live in today you don’t even have to commit a crime in order to be blackmailed.

In the light of these problems I have first hand experience of unexpected difficulties which can arise when I try to spend my own money, obtained legitimately, where the authorities have smeared my reputation, falsely,  as a criminal. Or even give it away. It looks like the authorities are determined to take my resources from me, hook or by crook and they are not even going to allow me to give my own money away, unless they can get their grubby hands on it or use it for their criminal purposes.

In the light of this the man who stood on the street and gave out money to passing strangers starts to make sense. Also that he was immediately put into a psychiatric unit, which can be the precursor of seizing an inmates resources on the grounds they are not capable of managing their own financial affairs.

And a salutary warning to anyone else with the same idea.